Ransomware Blocks U.S. Natural Gas Pipeline Supplies

Date:

Share post:

A ransomware attack on a U.S. natural gas supplying facility brought its operations to a standstill for two days when the organization’s incidence response team implemented a deliberate and controlled shutdown to contain the ransomware spread. In an alert issued by CISA (Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency), the government agency did not mention the time, date, type/name of the ransomware or the natural gas facility name that was impacted. But it did mention other vital information like the way this ransomware attack was carried out so that in future other organizations can take useful notes in planning their risk mitigation measures.

The Ransomware Attack

  • Initially, the threat actor used a Spear phishing link to obtain access to the organization’s IT network. Unfortunately, there was no network segmentation implemented to segregate the IT network and OT (Operational Technology) network of the gas facility. Thus, the threat actor slowly and successfully began compromising the OT network.
  • Simultaneously, a commodity ransomware was deployed to encrypt data on both these networks. This impacted the organizations’ OT network including its human machine interfaces (HMIs), data historians, and polling servers. The level of its impact was such that it resulted in a partial loss of control to its human controllers.
  • However, the programmable logic controllers (PLCs) used for controlling the supply chain of the gas facility were at no point compromised and thus, a total loss of operational control was averted when a complete shutdown was implemented.

Lessons Learnt

  • The organization did not implement network segmentation between its IT and OT networks. This allowed the threat actors to cross the IT-OT boundary and compromise both networks for a wider impact.
  • The attack was targeted towards Windows-based systems, whereas, PLCs only read the code programmed in their logic unit. Thus, no impact was recorded on PLCs directly reading and performing physical processes at the facility.
  • The gas facility had in place an incidence response for physical threats but never took into consideration a cyberthreat. Thus, they had a replacement equipment and last-known-good configurations backup ready. This at least facilitated a quick recovery process.
  • CISA also cited an absence of Multi-Factor Authentication system for remote access into the OT and IT networks from external sources. It strongly recommends having at least one additional check of authentication in such a critical infrastructure environment.

Subscribe

Name(Required)
Privacy(Required)

Upcoming Events

Related articles

Cyber Insurance Is No Longer Optional: In the Age of AI-Driven Threats, Can Your Business Afford the Risk of Being Unprotected?

By Kareena Bavisi, Chief of Staff | EC-Council It comes down to one number: what your worst incident would...

Why AI Governance Is Becoming Cyber Insurance’s Next MFA

By Kareena Bavisi, Chief of Staff to CEO at EC-Council I set out to understand why companies still don’t...

What the Nuclear Treaty Got Right, and Why AI Still Can’t Use It

By Jay Bavisi, Founder & Group President, EC-Council Nuclear treaties stopped bombs. They don't stop a file you can...

EC-Council Releases ADG 2.0 and Offers Its AI Governance Crosswalks Free to Every Government, Regulator, and Standards Body as Nations Split on AI Rules

With autonomous AI agents already reaching into government systems and no global treaty in sight, EC-Council will assist...